Cochrane · systematic review · CD008096
Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy versus nasogastric tube feeding for adults with swallowing disturbances
Gomes Jr, CAR, Andriolo, RB, Bennett, C, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2015 · Cochrane Library
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
4
current version
GRADE rated
4
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 1 · 25%Low 2 · 50%Moderate 1 · 25%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Show all 3 versionsPercutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy compared with nasogastric tube feeding for adults with swallowing disturbances
Population: adult patients with swallowing disturbances
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Treatment failure Feeding interruption, blocking or leakage of the tube, non‐adherence Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy vs nasogastric tube feeding | RR 0.18 [0.05, 0.59] | 8 studies · 408 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Mortality irrespective of Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy vs nasogastric tube feeding | RR 0.86 [0.58, 1.28] | 9 studies · 644 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Pneumonia irrespective of Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy vs nasogastric tube feeding | RR 0.7 [0.46, 1.06] | 7 studies · 645 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Adverse events irrespective of Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy vs nasogastric tube feeding | RR 0.83 [0.51, 1.34] | 6 studies · 597 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |